Surveillance on Religious Teachers Who Bypass Asatizah Recognition Scheme, and Safeguards for Minors in Mosque Activities

Dr Wan Rizal asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs what proactive surveillance and enforcement actions is MUIS taking to identify and penalise unaccredited individuals who bypass the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) by offering informal religious instruction, spiritual mentoring, or home tuition via social media platforms.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs to what extent will MUIS review safeguards for religious activities involving minors at mosques, including (i) supervision of interactions between adults and children (ii) verification of persons conducting religious instruction or mentoring and (iii) protocols for parents, mosque staff and youths to report individuals who operate outside of the authorised programmes.

Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs regarding the recent case involving an individual not accredited under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) who conducted religious lessons at a mosque (a) whether MUIS has established how he came to conduct such lessons; (b) whether similar unofficial lessons have been reported at other mosques; and (c) what safeguards is MUIS implementing to prevent such unofficial and unauthorised classes from taking place.

Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) whether the requirement for religious teachers to be accredited under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) applies to all persons conducting religious classes on mosque premises, including informal, private or self-organised classes by persons who are not mosque employees; and (b) if so, what measures can mosques take to identify and prevent uncredited religious teachers from conducting such classes.

Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) why a man recently sentenced for serious sexual offences was reportedly able to conduct religious classes in a mosque for the youth victims and their friends, despite not being a member of staff, volunteer, or an accredited religious teacher; and (b) what safeguards has MUIS implemented to ensure that only accredited asatizahs can conduct classes at mosques.

Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) with regard to the affected victims of sexual offences at the mosque premises, how is MUIS and MSF supporting them, especially with recent speculations on the victims’ identities online; and (b) whether there are plans to work with social service agencies or Malay/Indian/Muslim organisations to also support their families.

Dr Wan Rizal asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) whether mosques and Islamic education providers are required to conduct background screening on staff, volunteers and freelance instructors who work with children; (b) how many mosques have a written child safeguarding policy in place; and (c) whether MUIS will publish the findings of its current review and any resulting minimum safeguarding standards, so that parents can see what has changed.

Mr Sharael Taha asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) when the review of safeguarding measures at mosques will be completed; (b) whether it will strengthen safeguards for informal religious activities involving minors, including the verification of religious teachers, supervision of adult-child interactions and access to secluded areas; and (c) whether consistent mechanisms for reporting and responding to safeguarding concerns will be established across all mosques.

Mr Speaker, my response will address Question Nos 8 to 15 in today's Order Paper.

Mr Speaker, let me speak plainly about what happened. Two children were sexually violated at the hands of someone they trusted to guide them in their faith. My heart goes out to them and their families. The pain and trauma they have endured should never have happened. The judge described these offences as utterly abhorrent and heinous. I agree, I fully agree, and I share the community’s deep anger and deep sorrow on this matter.

Before I address the Members' questions, let me speak plainly to the victims and their family. You were let down by someone who used your trust against you. I am deeply sorry for what has happened. I want to assure you that we will learn from this and work hard to better protect our children.

Let me now speak on the support provided to the victims. I will then address the facts of the case. Finally, I will outline what we are doing and what more we will do to keep our children safe.

When the case was reported to the Police in April 2024, Victim Care Officers were immediately assigned by the Police to support the victims and their family. The family was already receiving professional support from a Family Service Centre, and a medical social worker followed up after the initial forensic examination.

When the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura or MUIS) was made aware of the details in August 2026, it also stepped in directly. PELITA, a MUIS initiative, has been working with agencies and community partners to help the children transition to a new school, provide psycho-religious support and offer financial assistance for their relocation and immediate needs. We will do our best to continue providing support where needed. I am also aware that the Adviser in the victim's constituency is also actively involved to provide ground support.

I also note there has been online speculation about the victims' identities. This must stop. Our children deserve protection and I urge everyone to be responsible.

Let me now address the facts of the case. MUIS was informed by the Police in July 2025 that the offender would be charged for sexual offences against minors, including offences at mosque premises. He had already been in remand since April 2024 and posed no further threat to the public. MUIS acted on this and issued an advisory in August 2025 to ensure that all mosques strengthened safeguards for minors, ensuring adequate closed-circuit television (CCTV) coverage and training staff to identify suspicious behaviour.

Subsequently, when more details were made available in August 2026 – just last month – MUIS investigated his activities more closely to find out how such harm could have happened. The offender was a regular congregant at the mosque. He gathered informally with small groups of youths in the main prayer hall. These were not religious classes that were approved or sanctioned by the mosque. It is quite common practice, as many Muslims know, to sit in the prayer hall and gather sometimes. So, it is not so easy to identify.

Under our regulations, religious classes must be conducted by teachers accredited under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS). The offender also posted religious content on social media. Through that online presence and his interactions with the victims at the mosque, they came to see him as someone they could trust for religious guidance. What were, in fact, informal, unsanctioned interactions felt like religious classes to the victims. This was not a failing on their part. He cultivated that impression deliberately.

This case exposes a troubling matter. Someone with no formal authority can still build a following online and position himself as a trusted guide to young people seeking religious knowledge. That trust was then used against them to inflict harm on them. We cannot be complacent about this. In fact, we owe it to the victims and their families to learn from this incident and do something about it.

Our mosques already have measures in place – pre-employment staff screening and approval requirements for external religious classes. ARS-recognised asatizahs are also subject to a Code of Ethics and accreditation every three years. So, they are screened, they are filtered, they are accredited. Where concerns and allegations arise, MUIS will take action, including making Police reports and suspending ARS recognition where warranted. These safeguards matter.

But rules alone are not enough. We want to build a shared sense of responsibility and partnership with our mosques, parents, children and volunteers.

Beyond these existing measures, I have asked MUIS to work with mosques, parents and the community to strengthen our safeguards. We want to be partners, not just regulators, in keeping our children safe. Our mosques must remain open and welcoming while ensuring that every child, every parent, every congregant can worship and learn safely with confidence.

This means establishing a common safeguarding approach across mosques, across all our mosques, clearer reporting and escalation protocols, closer monitoring of informal gatherings involving minors, safeguarding awareness training for staff and volunteers and periodic safeguarding checks. It also means partnering with parents, children and youths closely to equip our children to recognise inappropriate behaviour, understand personal boundaries and more importantly, know who to turn to when something does not feel right. Their voices matter in this effort.

Some of these efforts are underway and I am grateful for the active involvement of our mosque boards, staff and volunteers. This incident does not diminish their good work over the years. But precisely because our mosques are sacred places of trust, learning and belonging, we must hold ourselves to a higher standard. We can do more together, as a community.

So, I will convene a committee to review and examine our safeguards across our religious institutions and propose measures to strengthen them. This is not a top-down exercise. It is a partnership with our mosques, asatizah and most importantly, our parents, children and youths, where we can listen and learn from best practices, build safe and open religious spaces. So, we want to create a balance. We want to keep mosques open and welcoming but, at the same time, keep them safe and safeguard our children.

The committee will report directly to me and the findings will be shared with the community. It will be led by two chairpersons who are respected by the community – Assoc Prof Razwana Begum and Ustaz Fathurrahman Dawoed. I thank them for stepping up to take on this prominent role. They will be putting together their team, and we will announce the composition and terms of reference of the committee shortly.

The committee will focus on two areas. First, whether existing safeguards to protect minors, not just in our mosques but also in our religious schools, can be further strengthened. Second, how the community, particularly children and youths, can access religious guidance safely – covering oversight of both formal and informal religious instructions and emerging risks, including online influence. In doing this, we will strike a balance. We will strengthen safeguards to keep our children and youths safe while preserving the openness and welcoming spirit of our religious institutions.

Mr Speaker, our mosques occupy a position of trust. Parents send their children there because they believe it is a safe and sacred space. That trust is foundational to what our mosques are. We will look hard at where we fell short, strengthen our safeguards and act on the lessons from this case. Every child deserves to feel safe. Their well-being must always come first and that is a responsibility that we will not take lightly. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, what has happened has caused deep anger and sadness in our community. I, too, share this sense of anger and grief over what has happened.

We cannot take this matter lightly. I have asked MUIS to work with our mosques, parents and the community to further strengthen existing safeguards. Our aim is to ensure that our mosques remain truly safe, welcoming and open, so that every child, parent and congregant can worship and seek knowledge with confidence.

Our mosques play a very important role in the lives of our community. We must therefore always strive to do our best for our mosques and our congregants. I will establish a committee to conduct a comprehensive review of the safeguards in our religious institutions, identify areas for improvements and recommend measures to strengthen existing safeguards.

We will undertake this effort together – with our mosques, community leaders, parents, children and youths – to share our views, learn from best practices and build religious spaces that are truly safe and open.

The committee will report directly to me. It will be led by Assoc Prof Razwana Begum and Ustaz Fathurrahman Dawoed. We will openly share its findings and recommendations with the community.

Mr Speaker, our mosques carry a great responsibility. The trust that our community places in our mosques has been built and nurtured over many years. We must continue to protect and uphold this trust. We will learn from what has happened. We will examine what needs to be improved, strengthen existing safeguards and take the necessary steps. Every child has the right to feel safe. Their well-being must always come first. We will carry this trust with utmost responsibility and will never take it lightly.

Just be clear, the combined answers from Senior Minister of State Goh and Acting Minister Zaqy covered Question Nos 3 to 15. We will now take supplementary questions. Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, my thoughts are with the minors and family affected, and I hope that they are receiving the adequate care, reassurance and support that they need. And I would like to thank Senior Minister of State Goh and Acting Minister Zaqy for answering my two Parliamentary Questions (PQs). Mr Speaker, I have three supplementary questions on information sharing and inter-agency processes.

My first two questions are for Senior Minister of State Goh. Acting Minister Zaqy mentioned that Police only informed MUIS of the facts of the case in 2025, when investigations were completed. So, my first question, given the nature of the alleged offences to minors, is whether information could have been shared with MUIS earlier, given the potential implications on youths and activities at places of worship, especially since there were allegations against the offender dating back to 2021? I note Senior Minister of State Goh mentioned that earlier, but given the nature of the alleged offence, especially to minors and potentially to other minors, whether that could be one.

My second supplementary question is whether bail processes or conditions could be strengthened to reduce the risk of further offending while investigations are ongoing. This is especially so because of the nature of the alleged offence to minors in this case.

My last supplementary question is for the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs. Will there be clearer or more standardised reporting and escalation of protocols across all mosques going forward? More broadly, how can lessons and near misses be shared, not just across mosques, but in other settings, where children and youths interact with trusted adults beyond the mosque setting, so that weaknesses identified in one place can be addressed elsewhere?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the two supplementary questions directed to me.

First, I would like to reiterate that I have addressed the considerations, regarding the considerations back in 2021. Based on the facts of the case, the Police made the assessment that there was no strong public interest to disclose the offence. In 2024, the considerations were quite a bit different because of the serious rape allegations. And therefore, the Police moved in swiftly, arrested the individual on the same day, charged him in Court and the accused was remanded henceforth.

At the point of the individual's arrest in 2024, the Police did not inform MUIS, as the considerations were similar back in 2021, that the individual was not a registered asatizah, neither did he hold any formal appointment role or affiliation with the mosque. And as the individual had already been remanded, he was no longer an active threat to the community. And therefore, the Police made the assessment that there was no need for the Police to inform MUIS until investigations were completed, which they did in 2025.

In general, we avoid compromising the integrity of ongoing investigations unless there are very strong reasons which may warrant such disclosure.

When I took on this PQ, I also looked into the case and asked Police the question: whether they could have reacted differently in 2024, whether they could have anonymised the case information but inform MUIS, so that MUIS could have done something about it. But the Police shared with me, and I do agree with their position, that sharing anonymised case information can still lead to speculation, which could end up inadvertently prejudicing the rights of the accused.

The Police's assessment was that there were insufficient grounds to share information of the case with MUIS in 2024, even with the names withheld, for the following reasons.

First, as I mentioned, the individual was arrested in 2024 and been in remand since, and therefore no longer posed a threat to the public or the community.

Second, in order for MUIS or Government agencies to put in effective remedial measures where warranted, they need the full and the proper facts, including the circumstances which contributed to the commission of the offence. Such information would only be available after investigations are completed. And therefore, on balance, the Police made the decision and the assessment that there was no strong public interest to inform MUIS until investigations were completed in 2025.

Let me move on to the Member's second supplementary question. This has to do with whether we can strengthen bail conditions. Indeed, there have been cases where accused persons released on bail have gone on to commit offences and, in some cases, these have included sexual offences. But I think that leads to the point that no bail framework can guarantee zero re-offending unless we deny bail for all suspected offences, which obviously we cannot do.

I had explained earlier, I alluded to that, that we have a framework which categorises offences into bailable and non-bailable ones, and the question is therefore not whether re-offending on bail can be entirely eliminated but whether bail conditions are appropriately calibrated to the risk profile of each accused person, and as mentioned in my main reply, the Police imposes bail conditions, which are clear, practicable and necessary.

I thank the Member for his question on processes and escalation protocols. Currently, MUIS has incident management reporting framework for all our mosques, so that timely interventions can be made. When the incident happens at the mosque, the mosque must verify details and certainly involve the Police where the case is needed. In fact, since MUIS was informed in July 2025, there was one round, as I shared in my reply earlier, where MUIS sent out guidelines to enhance and strengthen protections for our youths and just keeping a lookout, safeguarding our mosques.

As we knew of more of the case when the sentencing happened last month, we came up with two rounds of enhancements to our frameworks to strengthen further our mosques by putting in more guidelines, keeping a watch for gatherings involving youths and kids, also putting in CCTVs where we can, and certainly rolling out measures where we consider low-hanging fruits to maintain a certain level of assurance to parents who are concerned about the safety of their kids in our mosques.

Can we go further? Certainly, and that is why I think it is a good opportunity to take learnings from this case, to see where we can learn from best practices, to learn what else we can do. But at the same time, as I said, keeping that balance to keep our mosques open and welcoming. And that is why we have set up the review committee to look at various areas, such as how we can improve, including even cultural barriers or community settings. Speaking to the community, there were concerns whether there were barriers also that prevented others from reporting such incidents from being escalated and even concerns from the community that reporting could harm an offenders' family, for example.

So, these are genuine concern sometimes from the community. But we have to overcome some of these barriers and I hope that the committee can look into how we can further strengthen education, awareness, have conversations with the community and engage them to build these new measures together as one. We will announce the committee in due course and certainly, look forward to their outputs in the coming months.

There are quite a few Members who want to ask supplementary questions. So, I will get to you, but please keep your supplementary questions succinct. Dr Wan Rizal.

Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar) (In Malay): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have three supplementary questions for the Acting Minister.

First, how will MUIS ensure that the new safeguards and guidelines are implemented consistently across all mosques, given that each mosque is different? How will compliance be monitored?

Second, what changes will be made to the monitoring of informal gatherings or activities involving our children and youths on mosque premises, including activities that are not organised by the mosques themselves?

Third, the Acting Minister has said that the offender in this case was not accredited under the ARS. How should parents understand the role and limitations of ARS in safeguarding our children? To what extent does the recognition process assess a person's suitability to interact with children or youths, and what additional screening and safeguards are needed beyond professional accreditation?

(In English): To the Senior Minister of State, why is the Government taking a while to strengthen the screening framework?

Mr Zaqy Mohamad (In Malay): I thank the Member for his questions. I will answer them in three parts.

First, on the implementation of safeguards in our mosques. MUIS implements these measures through four district offices that work closely with the Mosque Management Boards and mosque staff. This is to ensure that all information is clearly communicated to staff and volunteers, so that all existing protocols are properly implemented.

When MUIS was informed about this case in 2025, all 70 mosques were given the advisory on measures to strengthen safeguards at mosques. MUIS monitored their implementation regularly. First, mosques were required to report on their progress of implementing these measures at quarterly district-level meetings. Mosques were also given further guidance at these meetings.

MUIS also regularly reminded mosque leaders of the importance of reporting any serious incidents at the mosque clearly and promptly to the appropriate authorities, including the Police. For the new safeguarding measures, MUIS will ensure that they are implemented consistently across all mosques. In addition, the committee that I mentioned earlier, which will be set up, will study how mosques can better share information so that any issues can be addressed early.

Next, we will further strengthen the monitoring of informal activities at mosques. As I mentioned earlier, the offender used his informal interactions to present himself as someone with religious authority and gain the trust of his victims. That trust was thereafter abused. This is very concerning. We are studying ways to further strengthen existing measures. MUIS has tightened the monitoring of informal activities involving children and youths. Patrols have also been increased. Staff and volunteers will be trained to identify warning signs and take appropriate action.

MUIS will also conduct audits to ensure that safeguards are implemented at mosques. The committee will conduct a broader review of the measures and processes in our religious institutions – not only at mosques, but other religious institutions as well – and recommend stronger framework and reporting protocols.

At the same time, what is important is that our mosques remain open and welcoming, but safe for our children and youths. This requires close cooperation with mosques and asatizah, as well as parents, children and youths, so that our mosques remain as safe and welcoming spaces for religious and community activities.

Lastly, on the question about our ARS. Accreditation under ARS remains important to ensure that the Muslim community receives proper guidance from qualified and credible asatizah. Every ARS application undergoes a screening process, is subjected to a Code of Ethics, and must be renewed every three years.

MUIS and the Asatizah Recognition Board (ARB) regularly review the ARS framework. The Code of Ethics for asatizah is also currently being reviewed, and we will share more when the review is completed.

However, I agree that accreditation is no assurance of a person's conduct. If there are any concerns about the conduct of an asatizah, they should be reported. MUIS will investigate every feedback or complaint and take appropriate action, including suspending or revoking an asatizah's ARS accreditation.

The committee that will be convened will also study this matter further, including the appropriate actions to be taken while investigations are ongoing. For example, an asatizah could be placed on a temporary leave of absence until the investigation is completed.

We will also look at how reporting and information-sharing among mosques can be improved, so that any concerns can be identified and addressed earlier.

Mr Speaker, to the Member's question on why the Government has taken a while to review the screening framework, there are multiple considerations that we have had to work through. One fundamental question is how much the Government should step in to intervene in unregulated sectors. Should screening be mandatory or voluntary?

If we were to mandate it, how can we feasibly implement it across a diverse set of sectors and industries, especially many of those that are unregulated? How about freelance workers? How do we work to screen that group? How do we manage the compliance burden and the operational constraints that we may be inadvertently imposing on employers, on companies and on operators?

Another important consideration is the need to strike a balance between the protection of children and young persons, and the rehabilitation and re-integration of ex-offenders. What kinds of offences will we incorporate within this screening framework? I think these are some of the considerations. These are just some of the issues that we are working through with all the relevant agencies overseeing it, who possibly only have a weak link to the various unregulated sectors.

All these have to be weighed carefully. We will want to work through them quickly and we will provide updates when ready. So, I seek the Members' patience on this.

Mr Gerald Giam.

Sir, I agree with the Senior Minister of State that the safety of our children should take priority. But does he agree that the safety of our children should take priority over the privacy of ex-offenders convicted of sexual offences against children?

Sir, he said that the family is the first line of defence. Parents and caregivers are best placed to notice early warning signs. However, currently, religious organisations, tuition centres, sports academies or parents do not have a way to vet a candidate or volunteer for past sexual offences against children, apart from relying on self-declarations. Even news searches would not show up anything because perpetrators' names are usually anonymised to protect the victims.

To address this gap, I have proposed a consent-based mechanism using digital tokens via Singpass. Under this framework, a candidate authorises a specific organisation or parent to verify their clearance status. This provides verified assurance directly from official records without compromising the ex-offender's broader privacy.

Senior Minister of State Goh said that the Government is looking into a certificate-based system, but considerations would include the practicability of such screening requirements and whether employers, primarily our small and medium enterprises (SMEs), will be able to handle such screening requirements.

The digital token system I just proposed would be easy for SMEs and even parents to use, to vet individuals they are engaging to work with children. So, would the Ministry consider such a system to safeguard our children?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his two supplementary questions. I think the first pertains to the balance between the privacy of ex-offenders, as well as the safety of our children. In my main reply, I have already said that while we need to strike a balance between the two, the safety of our children will have to take priority, which is why we have also committed that we are reviewing the feasibility of how to implement a screening framework. So, that will come. I think the prioritisation in this case is clear.

Secondly, in terms of how we implement it, I do thank the Member for his suggestions. I think that is one possible way that we can consider implementing it. There are other feasible mechanism measures; and I think we may also have to consider how different sectors and different industries look at it differently. I note that in one of the questions I was replying to, Ms Joan Pereira also highlighted another alternative of how such a screening framework can be implemented. I reassure Members we will look into the various suggestions when we design and suggest the system to the public.

Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim.

Thank you, Speaker. I declare interest as chief executive officer of EtonHouse Community Fund, a community fund that works closely with children, as well as persons volunteering to work with children. I welcome the responses from both Ministries, signifying that in issues like these, it is often takes collaboration in tackling the safety of children in particular.

I wanted to understand a little bit more and I hear from the Senior Minister of State that it is about ensuring that the system we design, whether declaration or certificate-based, is something that does not paralyse the sector that is unregulated. Perhaps sharing on the approach involving key players, a consultative approach as we often take, will that be something that the Ministry would consider?

Second, to the Acting Minister, thank you again for convening such a committee, and involving key organisations and experts in the community. If I may also ask a bit more details on the committee. What other considerations will be included, in terms of the members, because as we all can ascertain today, it is not about where it happened; it is the fact that it did and that it involves an adult on the premise of trust and a child or a young person seeking guidance who is premising on trust as well. So, perhaps, if I can ask for clarity on that front? Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Regarding the committee which has been announced by the Acting Minister, may I ask if the Members could also possibly represent faith organisations beyond just mosques? This is because the lessons that we can learn from this committee, God willing, can also be applied to every institution, as these are shared spaces that are safe. So, perhaps some clarification on this aspect.

Mr Speaker, to the Member's question on various safeguarding measures and the screening framework, whether we will consult with industry and sectors. I think the first answer is that safeguarding measures will vary depending on the sector that we are talking about. However, I think, just to reiterate the point that the priority is the safety of our children. Ultimately, to be able to provide a more comprehensive safety framework and guidelines, the family, the community, society, members of public, schools, agencies, and our Family Service Centres will all have to play their role.

And hopefully, through a multi-layered approach, we will ensure that we have a much higher chance that one or more of those layers will be able to catch when one of our children is at risk. I think that is the overall approach that we would want to take.

The screening framework that we are looking into now will provide possibly another layer for us to be able to screen and mitigate the risk against such incidents. However, I just want to reiterate that it will not be a fool-proof mechanism. It is a layer, but not all cases will be caught with this.

In terms of how we will implement the screening framework, as I mentioned, there will be many sectors, especially many of the unregulated ones. We will have to do consultation to understand the challenges and considerations, and to make sure we are able to implement it smoothly. A successful implementation is one whereby our children are protected but at the same time, the implementation of the framework also matters because only when it is implemented well, are our children protected.

I thank the Member for her question. Certainly, this is something that we take seriously on setting up the committee and we hope that the committee will bring strong experience, expertise and valuable perspectives as well to their work. We want the committee to comprise of a strong line of members with relevant experience in the religious sector, as well as expertise in working with families and children, and also how to develop governance protocols within institutions.

So, it is not purely a mosque setting or religious setting that we are looking at, but also how we can learn from this, as a community, work collaboratively with parents and community partners to improve child safety in our mosques and religious settings, as well as a wider community if we can.

But specific to the committee, I have appointed, so far, Assoc Prof Razwana Begum and Ustaz Fathurrahman Dawoed, largely because they are both respected leaders of the community and they both have expertise working with children.

Assoc Prof Razwana has had 20 years of experience in the area of child justice and child protection systems and she is also the Chair of the Social Services Advisory Committee and certainly, with a deep voice and expertise in children protection and criminal justice systems. She is also the President of Persatuan Pemudi Islam Singapura (PPIS). So, I think that gives her a good background into how the cultural aspects of our community as well as how our Malay/Muslim institutions work.

Ustaz Fathurrahman is also a prominent and well-respected religious leader. He has a vast experience in the religious sector and is also as a full member of the Fatwa Committee and also Executive Director of Andalus Corporation, and also involved in the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP).

Both are quite in tune with the community. The composition of the committee will be further announced in due course. But I do expect the results and outcomes to be published before the end of the year. Because I think we do need to also put some clarity on to the ways forward into how our mosque settings and religious teachers can guide better and can be guided better.

Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.

Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State and the Acting Minister for the replies. I have one supplementary question for the Acting Minister. The individual builds trust with these children by presenting himself as a religious teacher online without any accreditation. Beyond strengthening the mosque's security, what is being done to address the risk posed by self-appointed religious personalities who reach minors through social media?

That is a serious concern. It is something we hope to study further as well as, as part of the review committee. One of the mandates that I have put into the review committee is to also look at the emerging risk, including online influences on religious education. This is a good lesson for us because we can do so much together in terms of protecting the physical space.

But this case has also taught us that influencers or characters out there with social media influence can potentially reach our children, our youths directly. But this is not just for the Muslim community. It is something that we learn from in terms of the wider awareness of what the dangers of online harms to our youths and children.

So, we should not see this as a pure religious issue or something that affects just the Muslim community. But I think this is good awareness for all of us with children, youths, the young that we care about, to watch over them, to guide them and to, most importantly, keep them aware of who they can come to if they see something suspicious or harm falls on them. I think that is very important.

So, as part of the study, the mosque institutions are something we will look at. But I think, there is a wider issue that we need to also address in the Malay/Muslim community and also, the wider community as well that we should not take these things for granted.

Mr Sharael Taha.

Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for the clarification on conditions of bail and the risk assessment framework determining the bail conditions, including the ones surrounding this specific case.

Given the circumstances of this case, I would like to reiterate Member Saktiandi's supplementary question: will the Government review and strengthen the risk assessment framework to better assess the risks of further offending against other children while an accused person is on bail?

I appreciate that Senior Minister of State has extensively explained that in today's risk assessment framework, it was all the right calls and how onerous it could be for stricter monitoring and the right balance we have to reach. But at the heart of this question is how do we prevent further occurrences? This could include, where warranted, stronger restrictions on access to minors, including monitoring or limiting social media interactions and appropriate monitoring until investigations or Court proceedings are concluded.

In this case, despite the bail conditions, they were all the right decisions, the accused was still able to continue to cause harm and it stopped only in 2024 after it was reported when further harm had already occurred.

While my first question concerns the safeguards around the alleged offender, we must also strengthen the wider safeguarding ecosystem. So, thank you Acting Minister Zaqy for sharing the committee that MUIS is forming to enhance safeguards for our children, youths and families. While this particular incident happened in the mosque, it could really have happened anywhere. I welcome Member Hazlina's proposal of including wider representation from other organisations into this committee.

I guess my supplementary question is from a wider perspective – how will the Government ensure that the lessons and the strengthened safeguards that this committee has formed can be read across nationally, so that we can better safeguard our children?

Mr Speaker, I can understand the Member's concerns and urge for us to review our processes in terms of what more can we do to ensure something like that does not happen – whether we have caught the weak signals, whether we have made sure that everything that can be done has been done or will be done in the future. I acknowledge that.

But I will reiterate that, in this case, the facts of the case back in 2021 was that the Police report was made, the charges were denied and investigations had to be done. Based on the facts of the offence, it was a bailable offence and therefore, based on what the Police had, the assessment was that it was a bailable offence, subject to certain bail conditions. And in the months and years following, the perpetrator actually complied with the bail conditions.

I think I will go back to, perhaps, the point that no bail framework is entirely foolproof and no bail framework can guarantee zero re-offending. We will have to calibrate it according to the risk factors within every single case, whether there are any antecedents and whether there were strong mitigating or aggravating circumstances in each of the cases. I think it has to be managed on a case-by-case basis.

Going beyond just the bail framework alone, like I mentioned earlier, there are multiple layers of defence that we have to do within our society, the family, community, and so on. I will not repeat that. All factors, all parts of the ecosystem must work hand-in-hand for us to be able to effectively provide the best living environment for our children to grow up in a safe and secure environment.

Acting Minister Zaqy, do you want to add anything? No? Okay. Mr Fadli Fawzi.

Mr Speaker, I want to echo my hon colleagues in extending my thoughts to the victims.

I would also like to ask the Acting Minister for some clarity about what happened so that we can better understand the systemic gaps that we need to address, which can help to reassure families that the common safeguarding framework is indeed fit for purpose. So, two questions, please, Mr Speaker.

First, did the mosque officials raise or receive any safeguarding concerns about the man in question during the 2022 to 2023 period when he was gathering with minor children for informal religious sharing in the premises of the mosque?

Second, and I want to be very careful here so as to respect the gag order and protect the victims, I understand that some members of the public have been able to deduce the identity of the offender from certain publicly available sources dating to the relevant period, among which are videos that raised allegations of sexually improper behaviour against the man in question. As such, the second question is whether mosque officials were aware about the allegations of sexual offences against the man that were circulating online as early as the second quarter of 2021, including a video in late-2022, claiming that Police reports have been filed against the perpetrator for sexual offences? In other words, considering that he was a regular congregant, was the mosque aware of the allegations against the perpetrator that were surfaced prior to and during the period when he was congregating with young children and youths at the mosque?

Mr Speaker, I think I have outlined the facts so far, to the best of MUIS' knowledge. Just to reiterate, MUIS was only informed of the case in July 2025. We have also checked our records between 2021 and 2025. There were no reports made to MUIS at any point in time by the Mosque Board, asatizahs or any member of the public pertaining to this case or the perpetrator.

As I shared, the situation was an unfortunate one, because the children and the perpetrator were known to each other. They saw him as a religious teacher even though he was not qualified, not certified and not allowed to run classes in the mosque. It was largely an informal gathering based on what we know now. And small groups, typically, you would find them in the mosque prayer halls doing mengaji, ceramahs and small gatherings, small groupings.

So, I think, we have to be quite practical about these. Because if you start banning every small group that gathers in the mosques for mengaji, reading the Quran and so on, that will make our mosques very restrictive. I have met members of the public in the past few weeks. Many also cited their concerns, saying, "Please do not restrict our mosques" because they want these to be welcoming and these are places for community.

So, it is a fine balance that we are trying to work with with this review committee – to make sure that as we learn from this incident, we keep our mosques open and welcoming and yet, at the same time, put in relevant safeguards. Are the safeguards today or even then sufficient? But that is also why, in 2025, when we first informed MUIS, within a month, it came up with the first set of safeguarding measures to all our 70 mosques. Subsequently, after the sentencing, we understood the facts of the case better because now, more was revealed. So, in the last month, we had two rounds where we have strengthened measures where we can.

On hindsight, many things could have been improved and we have done what we can so far.

But I think the review committee also shows that we have the appetite to go further and, certainly, learn from this and strengthen governance safeguards. More importantly, how we can educate, engage parents and work more collaboratively with the community to ensure that this does not happen again, because the mosque was just one setting.

As Member Sharael Taha earlier spoke about, and the other Members too spoke about, the dangers of online harms can happen anywhere. You have many of the other incidents happen outside the mosque and those are lessons for us too – that if we do not protect, do not make parents aware, not keep our children safe, not having the right or trusted places or persons they can go to when they need help most, I think, that is a failure on our part. This is where we will strengthen and we hope that we will be able to share more of our findings in due course.

Okay, last few supplementary questions. Ms Elysa Chen, make it short.

Mr Speaker, I would like to declare that I am the Executive Director of Campus Impact. It is a social service agency working with children from vulnerable families.

I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether, as the law stands, a person convicted of a sexual offence against a child can lawfully advertise as a private home tutor or a freelance sports coach or even serve as a volunteer the day after release, with no legal obligation to disclose that conviction to the parent or organisation engaging him? If so, what are the current measures to mitigate such a risk?

I would also like to ask that while the screening framework is being developed, will the Ministry consider an interim voluntary scheme allowing a freelance tutor, coach or volunteer to obtain some kind of document that they can show prospective employers, organisations or parents to provide some assurance?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. It is a very important one. For the offences that she has outlined and for ex-offenders who are released from those offences, in terms of regulated sectors, they would not be able to seek employment because there is an established screening framework for public agencies as well as regulated sectors.

However, for unregulated sectors, today, no such screening framework formally exists. Which is the reason why we have, also, in my earlier reply, said that we are looking into such a screening framework. We think there is merit for such a screening framework to be in place to help protect our children.

In the meantime, I note the Member has also suggested possible alternatives to fill the gap. What we want to do is perhaps move a little bit quicker on the screening framework, so that that will become the established format for how we are able to, in unregulated sectors, provide better protection.

Mr Azhar Othman.

Mr Speaker, this is to the Acting Minister. We look at the situation – and it is a troubling situation, of course – and the actions being taken. For the question I have, there are three parts to it. I will try to make it very short.

The victim came from a troubled family. I think they were trying to find solace and of course, where else? The mosque is the right place to go to.

My question is, how can we help such families in terms of comfort, in terms of financial and spiritual, so that they do not get into the wrong hands. They were looking for solace, and they got the wrong person to guide them. If they got the right person, they would have been nurtured to be a better human. So, that is the first question; to identify other potential families that may go into this kind of situation. That is number one.

Number two is, we realise that crime does not differentiate whether it is a religious setting or not. The point is that mosques must also be aware about that. The committee that is to be set up must be aware that this will happen and can happen. As such, are there precautions being taken, such as security to be added, just like in schools, to ensure our children are safe or the people coming to the mosque feel safe? And mosques play an important role in that part.

Thirdly is this; for sexual offences, the statistics have increased over the period. To look at this in totality, not just on a case purely, that if this is the case and it keeps on growing, what caused this to increase? Is it media? Is it pornography exposure? This is something that our institutions or the Ministry will need to look into carefully. We look at the —

Mr Azhar, we are approaching the end of Question Time.

So, those are the three questions that I want to ask, if the Senior Minister of State or Acting Minister can please reply.

I thank the Member. I will take the first two. The Senior Minister of State can take the third one on the wider trends.

On the issue of the child and the family, that is what angers me the most. Because the child basically came to the mosque for solace for religious guidance but unfortunately, he got the wrong person. This is where, as part of the review committee, perhaps we can see how we can improve the level of trust, the level of access that members of the community and those who need help can reach and approach the mosque.

Today, as I have mentioned, the moment we are able to identify or we are able to get connected with the relevant victims, the schemes and measures at the mosques and MUIS have, I think, are quite significant. The whole of community can come forward. And we do have the resources today – counsellors, engagement, financial assistance – even how to help them relocate, move schools, provide religious guidance and so on. But I think, the issue is then how do we reach out? That, I think, can be strengthened and is something that we can review, for sure.

The second question is on the safeguards. I think I have mentioned in my earlier replies that since we knew of the incident in 2025 and subsequently, two times since the sentencing, we have upped the measures in the mosques, including CCTV monitoring and checking on groups that involve children and youths. These are low-hanging fruits. Again, hopefully with the review committee, we can take a more holistic approach, learn from best practices, listen to parents and others in the community, and even youths themselves and kids, on how they view things and see how we can improve the interactions and trust-building.

So, I hope that assures the Member, but we will come back in due course with the results and findings.

Mr Speaker, to the Member's question on the broader trends on sexual offences and on outrage of modesty cases, let me cite some trends that we have observed from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The proportion of outrage of modesty cases involving offenders known to victims over the last five years generally has been stable. The number of sexual abuse cases involving our children over the last five years has also been stable.

Of course, the fact that the numbers are stable, and not decreasing, does not bring us any consolation at all. I think from MHA's end, we take a serious view on all such sexual offences. At the macro view, we can see it as a macro number. But every single case has hurt, damaged and caused long-term impact to not just the child, but also the entire family.

The Police will continue to work very closely with other agencies, including our schools, the Ministry of Social and Family Development, and Family Service Centres to make sure that we strengthen public education efforts, helping the public and the wider community understand how to look out for early warning signs and to intervene early.

Order. End of Question Time. Clarification by Minister for Social and Family Development.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]